Middle East Inside Line: "Warm" Turkish-Israeli Relations; Latest on Israel-Palestine Talks

Ankara's "Friendly Face" to Israel: Weeks after reports alleging that Ankara had been threatened by the US with a cut-off of military transfers unless ties with West Jerusalem improved, senior Turkish officials currently visiting Washington announced their commitment to preserving warm relations with Israel.

The Latest from Israel-Palestine-Washington: Haaretz reports that the Palestinian Authority submitted a paper, prepared by Israeli jurists, saying that --- contrary to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's claim --- Israel has the authority to freeze construction on private land. The PA demanded that the Obama Administration press for an extension of the freeze to East Jerusalem fr.

However, Haaretz reports,  from sources "close to the Obama Administration", that Washington will be urge Palestinians to soften their stance on Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor's proposal offering the continuation of construction in large settlement blocs but not in isolated settlements. In response to this "concession", land from Area C, which is both governed and controlled by Israel, will be transferred to Area B which is controlled by Israelis but governed by Palestinians.

Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who has proposed the continuation of settlement constructions in parallel with the "natural growth rate", stated on Wednesday that the de facto freeze in East Jerusalem cannot continue after 26 September:

Presently there are 1,000 housing units on the table in Ramot, another 600 housing units in neighborhoods like Gilo, east Talpiot, Har Homa and Pisgat Ze’ev. What, does someone expect that we will continue to freeze 1,600 housing units that went through all the [bureaucratic] procedures?

Pressure on Netanyahu Inside Israel: Speaking at a conference on Tuesday, Kadima Chairwoman Tzipi Livni accused Netanyahu of not being able to prevent the discrediting and delegitimising of Israel at the international level. She welcomed Netanyahu's decision to enter direct talks but warned him: "I hope the prime minister won't enter the talks as a favor to the Palestinians, or to the US, but rather that he will understand that this is in our best interest."

Ministers from the Labor Party are reportedly applying pressure on party chairman Ehud Barak to leave the coalition if Netanyahu turns toward the extreme right and clashes with Obama next month.

Israel-Palestine Analysis: Washington's New Push for an Agreement

Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas has said that he is ready for direct negotiations with Israel if specific conditions --- a total halt to settlement building in the West Bank and an acceptance of an independent Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders --- are met. As a sign of "cooperation", his political advisor Nimar Hamad stated that the PA is not opposed to the deployment of a NATO force, including Israeli soldiers, along the borders of a Palestinian state under a peace agreement.

Meanwhile, Washington has sent special envoy George Mitchell back to the region. On Tuesday and Wednesday, Mitchell had separate talks with Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Mitchell brought a proposal based on a March statement of the Quartet (US, Britain, United Nations, Russia) and a “defined timeline” and agenda for talks.

The Quartet statement asserted that negotiations should lead to a settlement, negotiated between the parties within 24 months, ending the occupation that began in 1967 and resulting in an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian state living side-by-side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours. The Quartet urged Israel to freeze all settlement activity, including natural growth, and to dismantle West Bank outposts erected since March 2001, and it underlined that the international community does not recognize Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem.

In his meeting with Israel's Netanyahu, Mitchell said that Abbas was ready to enter direct talks immediately if Israel accepted this offer. (Haaretz reports that Washington had rejected two earlier proposals put forth by Abbas.)

Netanyahu's answer? A firm "No". An anonymous Israeli official said:

The Palestinians have been raising different preconditions. As time goes on they have talked about a settlement freeze, then about Jerusalem as a precondition, about continuing where [former prime minister Ehud] Olmert left off, about accepting the ‘67 borders and now they are talking about the Quartet statement. If they want to look for excuses, they can find them. Let us move to direct talks.

On Friday, Netanyahu's office also released a statement denying a report from London-based newspaper Al-Hayat, that said that Israel would evacuate 90% of the territory and 50,000 settlers in the West Bank. The Prime Minister's officials said the claim is a lie.

After Mitchell's failure, Washington increased its pressure. US State Department spokesman Philip J. Crowley said on Wednesday that the Quartet was likely to issue a statement of support for the talks in the coming day.

Gaza Latest (11 August): Barak v. the PM, Turkey's Response to Netanyahu, Israel's "No" to the UN and More

Barak v. Netanyahu: On Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met the Turkel Committee, investigating the bloodshed following the incident on 31 May. However, Netanyahu refused to give answers and suggested talking behind closed doors on several occasions. When he was asked who conducted talks with Turkish officials, whether there were alternatives to the military option or the situation could have been resolved with Cairo's assistance, and about the claims that Israel had broken international law, Netanyahu showed the committee the door.

The next day, Defense Minister Ehud Barak appeared in front of the committee. Barak's testimony not only contradicted Netanyahu but said he was taking full responsibility for Israel's deadly raid, pointing out "operational mistakes" if not "failures": "The decision making process at the political level was not the reason for the reality that emerged at the end of the operation."

Barak said that an intelligence assessment and a range of potential outcomes, including the possibility of 'extreme scenarios' were discussed in the inner Cabinet, known as the 'Forum of Seven'. In contrast, Netanyahu had said discussions before the raid focused largely on the likely impact on public relations and the chance of violent confrontation had been mentioned only in passing.

Haaretz reports that Barak --- unlike Netanyahu --- answered all the committee's questions, albeit with some political tactics of his own:

Barak bombarded the panel with names, dates and facts before launching an evasive maneuver in the form of a pompous oration on the dangers of global terror and a nuclear Iran, helpfully informing the committee that Israel was not North America, or indeed Western Europe.

Turkey's Response to Netanyahu: After Netanyahu said Turkey had ignored repeated warnings and appeals "at the highest level" to halt the flotilla, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu responded on Tuesday:

No one else can take the blame for killing civilians in international waters. Israel has killed civilians, and should take the responsibility for having done so.Turkey has no responsibility in the attack on the flotilla.

Israel's "No" to the UN: The international probe led by former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer might have caused a problem for Israel even if this “complementary” commission has no scope beyond "investigating" internal reports on the deadly incident on 31 May.

The problem lies in UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's answer when he had agreed to keep Israel's military forces off limits in the inquiry. He said that "there was no such agreement behind the scenes."

In response, Haaretz reports, from a government source, that Israel will not allow the UN to question Israeli soldiers. Though the commission has no right to issue sanctions but just can give suggestions, Israel's position is firm.

One can only speculate that an investigation finding an Israeli soldier's conduct "inaccurate" could lead to further political consequences in the international arena, especially when arrest warrants for former Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and some senior military officials have been discussed in Europe?

Pressure to Dismantle the UNHRC's Probe?: Since the UN Human Rights Committee started its work on Tuesday, it has been reported that "key international players" are trying to persuade the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva to dismantle the flotilla probe. The justification is simple: If the Council does not stop as another UN-sponsored probe is in progress, it reinforces the HRC's image as one-sided and arbitrary.

Any guess whom these "key international players" might be?

Gaza Latest: Why Israel Is Welcoming the UN Enquiry

On Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu informed United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon that Israel would accept an international probe into the raid on the Freedom Flotilla on 31 May.

The panel will begin its work on 10 August and will file its first report with the UN Security Council by the middle of September. Heading the panel will be former New Zealand Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer, an expert on international maritime law. The vice chairman is outgoing Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, who is considered pro-Israel and pro-United States. Turkey and Israel also will send representatives.

This is the first time Israel is cooperating with a UN investigation of the actions of Israel Defense Forces. Haaretz reports the mandate of the panel:

The panel's mandate is to examine the investigations that Israel and Turkey are carrying out regarding the incident of the Gaza-bound flotilla on May 31. In addition, the panel will seek to examine the facts surrounding the flotilla and recommend ways to avoid such incidents in the future.

The panel will not be authorized to call witnesses --- especially no Israeli soldiers or officers.

So it will be a very limited investigation; the US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, said the nternational panel will be "complementary" to national enquiries. Rice added that the US expected  "that the Panel will operate in a transparent and credible manner and that its work will be the primary method for the international community to review the incident, obviating the need for any overlapping international inquiries".

So why did Israel, contrary to initial expectations, accept a UN panel? Because, at the end of the day, it is an investigation doing no more than looking at national (i.e., Israeli) investigations which have already tried to define the findings, findings which have already tried to contain the fact that nine activists died on board the Flotilla.

Israel-Palestine Analysis: Who Wants A One-State Solution?

Let's ask a very basic question: What is the most likely alternative to the two-state solution? For the Israeli right and the majority of Palestinians settled in the West Bank (according to a poll by the Palestinian Ma'an News Agency), it is a one-state agreement. Based on this data, we can read political motivations behind these preferences.

In an article published in Haaretz, former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Arens argued that Israel had to break its taboos by granting Israeli citizenships to Palestinians. He said:

We are already a binational state and also a multicultural and multi-sector state. The minorities [meaning Arabs] here make up 20 percent of the population --- that's a fact and you can't argue with facts.

Israel-Palestine: A Secret Deal to Start Direct Talks?
Middle East Inside Line: Rockets Hit Eilat, Iran Responds to “US War Plan”, US $ for Israel Missile Defence

So Palestinians would be granted equal rights, such as the right to vote for a new Knesset. The second generation of Palestinian granted equal rights, if not the first generation, would be enjoy their lives in Jerusalem's telecommunication sectors, on Tel Aviv's beaches (world's 9th best) and in Israel's Hebrew University (which is in the top 100 universities in the world).

Critics from the Israeli "left" contend, however, that while this proposal provides the Palestinians full personal rights, it also envisages a country whose symbols and spirit will remain Jewish: what is sought by the right-wing is a "democratic Jewish Israel". The Palestinian problem would become a domestic issue. Instead of dealing with the Obama Administration, Ramallah's foot-dragging strategies, United Nations' telling offs and "provocative" flotillas, problems related with Palestinians granted Israeli citizenships would turn to their loyalty to the Jewish character of the state or their relatively high birthrate.

On the Palestinian front, those who argue for a one-state alternative and political "vision" assume that Palestinians would overtake the rule of the state through the state's democratic channels. However, the Palestinian question would face new and more complex problems and the nationalist movement could lose its support from the emerging Palestinian elite.

Beyond these political calculations, if the Ma'an poll reflects the general public opinion of Palestinians, questions emerge. Is this a "hopeless" reaction to the division of Palestine and a historical memory of defeat? Is it a surrender to the "enemy"? Or is it weariness of harsh living conditions imposed by politics and the futile hope of the better life lived by their Jewish neighbours?